MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2755744672 · doi:10.1109/ivsw.2017.8031554

Learning lemma support graphs in Quip and IC3

2017· article· en· W2755744672 on OpenAlexaff
Ryan Berryhill, Neil Veira, Andreas Veneris, Zissis Poulos

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicFormal Methods in Verification
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsComputer scienceSatisfiabilitySatisfiability modulo theoriesFormal verificationModel checkingSubroutineBoolean satisfiability problemTheoretical computer scienceLemma (botany)GraphFunctional verificationRuntime verificationProgramming languageAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Formal verification is one of the fastest growing fields in verification. The Boolean satisfiability-based unbounded model checking algorithm of IC3 has become widely applied in industry and is frequently used as a subroutine in other formal verification algorithms, such as FAIR and IICTL. Any improvement to IC3 can therefore yield substantial benefits in many areas of formal verification. Towards that end, this paper introduces the notion of a support graph, which is applied in IC3. Techniques are presented to compute the support graph by modifying the satisfiability queries used in IC3 at the cost of a modest increase in runtime. It is used to increase the re-use of information across runs of the model checker, thereby improving runtime performance in incremental model checking. It can also be applied within a single run of the model checker to avoid unnecessary queries to the satisfiability solver and accelerate the discovery of a proof. Experiments are presented on HWMCC'15 circuits demonstrating the benefits of the presented approaches.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.767
Threshold uncertainty score0.206

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.037
GPT teacher head0.322
Teacher spread0.285 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations3
Published2017
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicFormal Methods in VerificationFrench-language works237,207